this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2024
123 points (96.9% liked)

Not The Onion

19180 readers
764 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

What’s up the phrasing on that headline

all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Why on earth would they put cameras in locker rooms?! That vague “safety and security” Is not going to cut it as an acceptable reason.

This wouldn’t fly as a reason to put cameras in women’s locker room, and it shouldn’t fly as a reason to put on in men’s, either.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

I’m assuming there’s either stealing issues, or some form of harassment happening.

Doesn’t matter, the camera is passive and not going to correct whatever liability concern have; while introducing entirely new liability concerns…

[–] CluckN@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

They probably had some repeated instances of stealing and thought a $2000 security camera setup is cheaper than hiring more staff. I’m assuming they also can’t admit they have an issue with thieves because it could make them look bad?

[–] TommySoda@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

A good thing to remember when they do things for "safety and security" is that they aren't talking about your safety and security. This is just a liability issue they are trying to avoid while pretending it's for your benefit.

[–] dmtalon@infosec.pub 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This will 100% not end well. I think we've yet to see even hardened financial / data collection systems be hack-proof. A random gym is not going to safeguard that data and/or monitor it responsibly.

[–] nokturne213@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

monitoring of these specific areas will be discrete and only accessible by trained monitoring technicians.

Sounds like they proved you wrong. /s

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 9 points 1 year ago

I definitely have an expectation of privacy in a locker room...

[–] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 9 points 1 year ago

Put cameras in the women's locker room & that place would be burned to the ground 5 minutes later...

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

If they can't do it to women, why can they do it to men?

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

If the market doesn’t respond by absolutely burying that business in the first few months, this will spread.